The e-platform gathers two main sets of data, one purely quantitative (“yearly quantitative overview”) and one with more articulated information on the evolution of cases (“case-tracker”).

Yearly quantitative overview

The yearly quantitative overview includes raw statistics on the numbers of investigations, indictments and final rulings related to organised crime, corruption, money laundering, and other serious crimes. Enlargement countries are requested to provide yearly statistics of these elements, in order to support the preparation of the
Enlargement Package.
As reported in the Enlargement Package, these include: corruption (including abuse of office or official authority; trade in influence; giving - accepting gifts or other forms of benefits); organised crime; production and trafficking of drugs; money laundering; trafficking in human beings (in particular for sexual exploitations); terrorism; smuggling of migrants; trafficking in firearms; cybercrime; money counterfeiting.
  • Period covered: The data must be encoded retroactively from 2018 (and, if available, it may be encoded from 2015 in order to allow the reconstruction of trends over a longer period). Once the data from the past periods have been encoded, it should be encoded every year for year N-1.
  • Deadline: The cut-off date to encode data into the yearly quantitative overview is 30 June, for data covering the previous year (e.g., at the latest on 30 June 2024, all data for the year 2023 must have been encoded).
The yearly quantitative overview, the data pertaining to investigations, indictments and final rulings is arranged per number of individuals / entities involved (and not per case). This means that in case of investigation, indictment or conviction for several offenses, data will be computed several times - one in each relevant category. For example, if one person is indicted for organised crime, cybercrime and trafficking in human beings (THB) in the same criminal proceeding, the data will be counted three times in the yearly quantitative overview: once for organised crime, once for cybercrime, and once for THB.

Case-tracker

The case tracker aims at monitoring the handling of investigations, indictments and rulings specifically related to high level corruption, organised crime and stand-alone money laundering cases, providing information that allow tracking the evolution of such investigations and cases throughout the law enforcement and judicial chain. A specific internal procedure should be set up for the encoding of data into the case-tracker, with clear responsibilities between the various services involved along the rule of law chain, deadlines and periodic checks.

Here, contrary to the yearly quantitative overview, the data is gathered per case, and not per individual/entities concerned. Only one “fiche” per case should be created, and followed throughout the rule of law chain. The advanced functions “decouple”, “merge” and “retrial” allow to create a separate fiche in specific cases.
  • Period covered: The data must be encoded retroactively to cover all cases that were ongoing on 1 January 2022 (whether they have been finalised in the meantime, or are still ongoing).
  • Deadline: By 30 June all cases that have been finalised in year N-1 need to have been encoded
Please refer to the annex and to the mock case circulated for concrete examples of encoding data into the case-tracker.
Explanations of serious and organised crime and high-level corruption

Serious and organised crime
  • Organised crime
  • Production and trafficking of drugs
  • Money laundering
  • Trafficking in human beings (in particular for sexual exploitations)
  • Terrorism
  • Smuggling of migrants
  • Trafficking in firearms
  • Cybercrime
  • Money counterfeiting
  • Other prominent serious crime at country level (e.g. illicit tobacco trade/trafficking for Montenegro)

High-level corruption

High-level corruption cases correspond to the cases defined as such by the national legislation or, if there is not such legislation, to the following cases:
  • High-ranking or high profile elected/appointed public office holders.
    For example: heads of State, heads of government(s), ministers and deputy or assistant ministers; members of parliament or equivalent legislative bodies; members of the governing bodies of political parties; mayors of the capital city/ main cities or municipalities/ district in each beneficiary country; highest ranking officials of federal units.
  • High-ranking civil servants and high-ranking members of the law enforcement, prosecution, or judiciary.
    For example: heads and deputy heads of institutions, bodies and administration (such as taxation administration, law enforcement agencies, intelligence agency, central bank; army; embassies); members of supreme courts, of constitutional courts or of other high-level judicial bodies administrating the judiciary, the decisions of which are subject to further appeal only in exceptional circumstances; and prosecutors working in prosecutors' offices corresponding to these high level judicial bodies president of courts; members of judicial or prosecutorial council.
  • Heads of major public or semi-public companies.
    For example: directors of companies in strategic sectors such as electricity, telecommunications, water, etc., where the State is the owner or a major stakeholder.

In federal constitutional structures, this list includes both central state and lower level of governments.

In addition to the above mentioned criteria and, where relevant, the national legislation defining high level corruption cases, countries are invited to report cases of corruption involving defendants who may not strictly fall under the above categories but are involved in investigations/cases that can be considered to still be of high-level nature (e.g., due to particularly high amount of the bribes, the extent of the damages to public interest stemming from the contested crimes, or the overall political repercussions, etc.).

National set-up for encoding data: national coordinator and data feeders

A national coordinator and data feeders shall be appointed by each country. The data feeders are responsible to encode the data into the e-platform, and the national coordinator is responsible for steering and coordinating the work of the data feeders, perform regular data quality checks, and is the single entry point for the Commission regarding matters related to the e-platform. In order to ensure an effective and efficient encoding of data, the national coordinator should communicate clearly on the aims of the e-platform, on the respective responsibilities of data feeders and on the deadlines to encode the data. Data feeders should address any question or issue to the national coordinator, who will liaise with DG NEAR and the JRC as relevant. The national coordinator should set up regular meetings with the data feeders to gather feedback and ensure that the encoding process is running smoothly.

Annex: Examples of data feeding into the case-tracker

The purpose of the case-tracker is to allow tracking the evolution of cases, from the launch of the investigation to a possible final verdict. It is by nature evolutive. The dedicated module in the e-platform consists of separate data blocks, divided per phase of proceedings (investigation, indictment, first instance trial, second instance trial, and when applicable third instance trial). Specific information on cross-cutting issues (e.g., restrictive measures, assets seizure/freezing, assets confiscation) are also collected per each investigation and case.

Technically, the encoding of data can be done by starting at any data block (e.g., the block including information about the third instance can potentially be filled in even before the block with the details of the investigation, although chronologically the launch of the investigation clearly occurred first). The e-platform is programmed to aggregate the available data in the right order. However, eventually, all the blocks relevant for the case should be filled in, in order to give a complete overview of the case and allow its proper tracking through the aggregation of meaningful trends.

The launch of the transitional phase of data feeding into the platform is intended to give to the competent institutions in each Enlargement country sufficient time to start encoding and get acquainted with the new e-tool. The tracking of cases related to organised crime, high level corruption and money laundering will pertain to:
  1. cases that have been finalised after 1 January 2022;
  2. cases that were launched as from 1 January 2022.

1. All relevant cases that have been finalised as from 1 January 2022 to date should be encoded, regardless of whether the investigation or other phases before the final judgement were completed before the starting date of the data collection. The encoding should start with the final decision definitely closing the case (e.g., rejection of indictment, verdict in first, second, third instance), but all the other blocks will have to be filled in at best, depending on the availability of all the information.

Example 1: in August 2022, a final conviction was pronounced on a high-level corruption case. It might well be that the investigation was opened a couple of years earlier, for example in April 2020. Since an action pertaining to this case (a conviction) happened after the cut-off date of 1 January 2022, the case has to be encoded in the platform. If all information are available, data feeding can be completed with whatever sequence. If the initial data available only pertains to the final judgment, data feeding could start with the block pertaining to the “third instance””, and then all the blocks corresponding to previous stages (as well as relevant blocks such as, e.g., assets seizure and assets confiscations) can be filled in, based on available information, as soon as the evolution of the case is reconstructed.

Example 2: an investigation was opened in March 2021 against a group of individuals for money laundering. This would be before the cut-off date. If one assumes that the indictment lodged by prosecution was eventually rejected in May 2022 (hence after the starting date date) the information on the case has to be encoded. Once again, if all data are available and all the evolution of the case is traced, data feeding can start from whatever point. Otherwise, the data feeding in the platform can start with the block “indictment” ”, with the latest available data, and then all the blocks corresponding to previous stages (as well as relevant blocks such as, e.g., restrictive measures) can be filled in at best, depending on the availability of all the information.

Example 3: an investigation was opened in June 2020 against an individual, member of an organised crime group. S/he was indicted in July 2021, and the first instance trial started in September 2021. In February 2022, a plea bargain was concluded. The case can be encoded in the platform starting with the block “plea bargain” , and then all the blocks corresponding to previous stages (as well as relevant blocks such as, e.g., restrictive measures, assets seizure or assets confiscation) should be filled in at best, depending on the availability of all the information.

2. All relevant cases that are still ongoing as of 1 January 2022 should be encoded. The encoding can start with the most recent closed step, but all the other blocks corresponding to the previous stages will have to be filled in as well. Along with the evolution of the case along the criminal justice chain, data will need to be fed concerning the next stages.

Example: an investigation was opened in December 2019 against the president of a supreme court for corruption. In February 2020, s/he is indicted and in April 2021, s/he is convicted. Following an appeal, the case goes to second instance and is currently pending. There has been no significant evolution on this case for the past year and the first trial instance is ongoing.. The case can be encoded in the platform starting with the block “second instance”, with the information on the ongoing appeal, as it is the most recent step that is ongoing, and then all the blocks corresponding to previous stages (as well as relevant blocks such as, e.g., assets seizure and assets confiscations) should be filled in. When the case progresses (e.g., the person is acquitted in second instance), information on new development will have to progressively be filled into the platform until the case comes to its final stage and is considered closed.


For an example of case encoded in the case-tracker, please see the mock case circulated.